skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's like someone beating you with a stick, and then they stop and you're like "Thank you for stopping beating me".

It is crazy that a company that brags about privacy had a cross-app tracking system to start with
It is surprising how few people are arguing the “private company can do what they want” angle here. I wonder how the balance will look next time big tech bans a bunch of conservatives.
70.87B Why the Retail Brokers Just Betrayed Their Customers
So? Is Tesla worth 10x what it was worth last year? I don't think so. Same for almost any tech stock.
But the shares are the user's property. Isn't this theft, since the person got whatever robinhood thought it was worth without consent? (presuming the user wasn't buying on margin which probably includes an agreement that they will liquidate if you won't be able to cover reasonably).
No, where is scares them is at the copyleft level, when they are writing software. You're quite right that it probably doesn't scare many when they are just using it as an appliance (e.g., a database).
Short squeezes happen all the time and RH does absolutely nothing about it. The only time they stepped in was when their partner (Citadel) had an investment in a firm that was losing billions of dollars. I think the burden is on them to prove this wasn't manipulation because it's otherwise so blatant.
Too take the exact opposite view :

Simply put, if my employer told me I needed to setup zoom calls every time I need to talk to someone more than 5 days per month, I would find a new employer.
I'm less productive than ever. I'm more depressed than ever. I'm eating poorly and drinking more. I almost don't sleep anymore. I just want to spend few hours by myself instead of being constantly around my family members. My finances are unchanged.

I won't give this up. Give me a schedule, a break from home to work, let me see and meet people.
A pound of flesh: how Cisco’s “unmitigated gall” derailed one man’s life (2010)
Becuase the market price isn't $10. There is a price people are willing to buy and a price that people are willing to sell- which makes sense because if there's a price in the market someone is willing to sell at and I'm willing to buy at that price I won't put an order in the market at all - I'll just trade against their order. So there's a difference between the bid and the ask. So in the market you'll have people willing to buy at $9.90 and sell for $10. Now in reality the true value is somewhere in that range. But if I think the real value is $9.93 I might not want to put an offer in the market for $9.95 because the price might move, and if the price moves I'm stuck paying $9.95 for something that just dropped to $9.70. For the offers I put into the market, I have to add some extra margin to account for risk. Whereas if you come directly to me and say you want to $9.95 - well I know you're not going to move the market, so maybe I'm willing to trade with you for a smaller margin, safe in the knowledge I'm not taking on a very risky trade.
That's not how this works. Of course the play is bad if you completely ignore that the key part of the play is that short sellers and call contract writers are contractually obligated to buy pretty much regardless of the price. Whether or not it pans out this way for most retailers is yet to be seen, but the mechanism is sound and the risk is in not having data available to you on what the outstanding short interest is.

It's not a loss until you sell, and a key date to sell (tomorrow, when tens of thousands of 1/29 calls expire) hasn't happened yet.
The thing the SEC is going to take issue with is lying to investors. Investors have a right to know what's going on with their money.

And despite how it seems from outside Wall Street, hedge funds are definitely scared of the SEC. Banks worry less because their money is sourced differently. Hedge funds have to worry about legal action not just for the fines but also for scaring their investors. When individual investors are so large it only takes a few redemptions to significantly impact AUM.
> There isn't enough stock for them to close their position

Tens of billions of dollars of GameStop have been bought and sold over the past few days. If you can buy GameStop to go long, you can buy it to cover a short.

Note that there isn't a limit on rehypothecation. A share sold short by Bob can be used by Anna to cover her pre-existing short.
You mean, you can't have some that are always remote and some that are in the office? Like a split?
If you read the subsequent messages, there's a strong suggestion that these are shares bough on margin call.
Source? Here's mine [0]

[1]: https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1q8swwwtgr7nt...
just a reminder not to believe random images off the internet that can be easily doctored.

Especially when they're trying to sell you something with the follow up tweet. :)
> The rest of the institutional guys are fine

Yes, that must be why trades are restricted, wsb got infested with bots and banned from discord, and the media is in full shit flinging mode against wsb.
Emailed them to see if they give a reasonable answer, smells like Robinhood :/
Not revenue, but RH publishes their order flow percentages, which shows Citadel is at the top. Here's one from last year: https://cdn.robinhood.com/assets/robinhood/legal/RHS%20SEC%2...
Well, Android has the same thing, except you can't even turn it off in Settings! (you can on regenerate the ID). On iOS you could always just disable it.
There's plenty of outrage about payment for order flow; see every thread about payment for order flow. The SEC argument that RobinHood was misleading about it rings a bit true to me; but payment for order flow isn't the problem there and isn't what the SEC was upset about; it's the split between the brokerage and price improvement.

As a retail investor, I'm a little squeemish that firms want to pay me to trade with me, but given the National Best Bid and Offer requirements, I don't see what the downside is for me. It's like accepting a deal at the electronics store that's listed as 'no resellers.'
When you divvy up shares in an investment to meaningless portions like 0.00001% of a company there's no utility in the investment period.

It then becomes the same thing as buying and selling useless paper. In order to make the system truly a market you have to restrict the size of the portions. Something like 1% is the smallest cut someone can own.

But then that would stop the huge amount of cash companies tend to receive during an IPO thereby restricting the growth of the actual business.
If you want anything to be fixed, you'll really need to be more specific... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> If you close those, you are basically closed-source with an option to peak at the code.

Oh no. Closed-source with an option to peak the code does exist.

This is not it. Because it is licensed GPL. Which means you have the option to copy the code into your own project. In whole, or just looking at particular parts that are useful. You have the option to fork it and do whatever you want to it.

If you got some people together that thought "gee, we like this, but we wish it took PR requests", you are legally allowed to copy the code into a different project (ie fork it) that takes PR requests, and become the maintainers of that project.

This is *HUGE*. You can't do that with closed source even if they let you see the code. There is a very big difference between "closed source that lets you see the code" (which does exist, but this isn't it) and "open source". And it's not whether they take PR's -- closed source can take PR's too. The a proprietary company will let you volunteer your time to submit improvements to their code does not make it open source. It's about who (if anyone) controls the code and can decide who is allowed to use it or not, not just see it.It's about the license.

It is important that we as developers and decision-makers about what code to use understand this difference.
You can try looking at a Staff directory for each department. They usually have the professor's photo, contact information, and maybe a link to their professorial website.
when will E2EE get out of Beta?
I’m sure if you came about entrepreneurship at the highest difficulty setting, it’s hard to shake your own perspective. As a person who has tried twice and failed both times, I totally agree there is no easy path. There are however, lower difficulty paths and those paths lead to better outcomes for entrepreneurs.

If you keep at it, are smart, have good ideas and execute, I think you can probably build an equivalent network over time that leads to success. I always like to think that investors fund people more than ideas.
All the Ways the GameStop Roller Coaster Could End
Comparing taskbars and desktop panels, & musing on the One True Linux Way
At this point, it is a cultural artifact.
Measuring the impact of 95,000 landing pages
Fantastic domain name
But what happens when all that liquidity provided by squeezed shorts dries up when either they all capitulate or the price starts to come back down?
Context, to me, seems to be that firefox + tree style tabs is a better implementation of what vivaldi is showing here.
Especially when the person posting the pictures at the same time advertises for competing brokerages a bit of skepticism is advised
Nice blast(s) from the past :)
It's from a time before StackOverflow (and StackExchange at large) got very ridged with all the rules. Back then, there were a lot of "fun" questions and answers, including the infamous "What is the best comment in source code you have ever encountered?"[1]

Some old timers might remember those days... SO was a much more fun place back then. Now it's rife with down-voters, close-voters and hostile-towards-newbie folks.

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/184618/what-is-the-best-...
"...45 and the Republicans attempted to throw out the results of an election."

Do you mean that 45 Republicans voted against ratifying the electoral college votes? My understanding is that that vote is largely procedural and that the losing side voting against it as a protest is common in every election. If you take away that context it makes for a great narrative in this election (the whole histrionic overthrow theme), but context often matters.

My understanding could be wrong, though. I couldn't quickly put my hands on the historical voting record. Or maybe that's not what you're referring to.
> The demographics (and housing prices!) in the tech hubs reflect a big influx of highly-paid developers

How? For at least the last decade, your typical developer in the Bay Area has been a renter...long since priced-out of a single-family home. Even FAANG developers are priced out of the better suburbs.
If you don't want to get fake news from sites like Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms; then use reliable news sources like the New York Times, Washington Post or Guardian.
If you look at the comments it seems like the Reddit post was after the announcement from Melvin, because people are accusing them (Melvin) of lying.
"Stocks react predictably as Robinhood uses its platform to manipulate the market"
One of the first ever desktop app stores had its desktop app developed entirely by a flyover state team in 2002. So the devs exist, if you can find them.

Also, there's plenty of C-level talent in the bay. You can pay the same and get B+ or better in an inland state.
Speed up pip downloads in Docker with BuildKit’s new caching
I have deep sympathy for this, after having done a ton of work with the SWF format and the (even more poorly documented) AEPX format.
I’d guess that this must be a margin account. In that case the broker is perfectly entitled to liquidate positions that they consider too volatile and risky.

If it’s a cash account, then yes, they’d have no right to do this. I’m no lawyer, but I’d assume you’d very likely be able to sue them for any losses.
I have seen a lot of people throw in fractions of a share or less than 10 shares. What you might have observed is the law of large numbers. When you have 4 million people putting in fuckyou money some of them actually have a few hundred thousand to spare and those get voted up.
People are extrapolating way too much from a study in Israel about their market, culture, and system. While it is a truism that starting a company is easier with money than without, that doesn't explain the abundance of poor immigrants (here in the US) who build businesses. Nor is any of it a clear indicator that shifting policy towards blanket money hand-outs would be an efficient means of increasing entrepreneurship. The left-tech's attachment to universal hand-outs looks much more like a guilt-salve than reasoned, efficient policy.
A snarky, yet sadly a very true, comment would be that Facebook has a lot more money to spend on lobbying.
Counterparty Risk
(This comment was originally a reply to "Robinhood makes most of its money selling customer orders (2020)" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25946626, but we've merged it into the main thread.)
> That's demonstrably false.

That's because you truncated my sentence to pretend I made a claim I didn't make. What I did say is that nobody is marketing lottery tickets as an investment or (or posting screenshots of how much they've spent on lottery tickets to encourage others not to cash out). They're literally not allowed to in those ads you mention.

> You clearly haven't read any of the GME threads on WSB. Pretty much everyone is saying to only invest what you can afford to lose. Most people are buying small amounts just to f##k with the hedge funds, and they are outspoken about it.

All the top threads are people encouraging others not to take their money out because it'll hold its value, honest, and the specific stakes people are sharing range from thousands to [options on] millions. You don't see people make those kind of bets on lotteries, and people with financial upside from lottery ticket sales certainly aren't allowed to encourage them to.

I mean, the whole reason we're having this discussion about Wall St versus the common man is because people here are treating entering the market at this stage as an opportunity rather than a negative EV gamble for people looking to join the action. If a vendor stops selling tickets for a particular lottery, nobody acts like wannabe customers or ticket holders dreaming of bigger jackpots are victims.

> Buying a lottery ticket for a dollar, hoping they make much more? Isn't that the whole point of a lottery?

The point of buying a lottery ticket for a dollar for what even the dumbest lottery player knows is an tiny chance of winning isn't very similar to the point of buying what used to be $20 stocks starting at $200 after reading an "AT THIS RATE $5,000 IS GOING TO BE NOTHING FOR GME" post.

> But suddenly, when a big hedge fund is caught with their pants down, people like you come out and pretend like what's happening is a big problem, and we have to stop the trading "because some people can lose money".

Casinos block people from some gambles all the time (especially if something funny's going on or they think they might get sued). Nobody cares. Some brokers stop people from some gambles on their platform and people gnash their teeth with rage at how unfair it is, before flipping to arguing that it's just a game people are playing with what they can afford to lose. The double standard here isn't mine.

And yes, most people buying today would lose money (with or without broker intervention). That's not a reason to for Robinhood to stop the trading, it's a simple observation which is hard to square with arguments that stopping the trades is some monstrous imposition on the common man.

As for the hedge funds and investment pros, some of the longs would have loved to see more retail investor action today, and some of the shorts are already out.
That means some extra years/decades off from your career, to get to the same level of security. So this is not overstating it, it just basically says if there is capital available ambitious ventures will succed at a more frequent rate.
What is more extreme than attempting to violently overthrow the government?
This sounds a little pedantic to me. Citadel has exposure to a short position in GME due to their deal.
I worry at the long term implications of remote work:

- I hear of Bay Area tech companies throwing stupid high salaries at senior devs in smaller local firms -> more consolidation in tech

- how non people centric will work become? I feel being 100% remote I have even less of a relationship with anyone at home. I’m a commodity doing work. Maybe there’s more of a temptation to get that commodity cheaper elsewhere
There is a difference between a normal margin call and manipulating rules on your platform to force margin calls for the benefit of Citadel. I hope Kenneth C. Griffin joins Mike Milken in a list of crooks who actually got convicted.
If Mozilla cares so much about privacy, why don't they enable an ad blocker by default?

Why don't they get rid of Pocket?

Why don't they remove tracking from their own new tab page?

Mozilla is dead to me from a privacy perspective, and they've also made their product inferior.
For what it's worth, I think that's true of the pre-1997 version of the format. For the format from 1997 to 2007, it's a proper format, albeit a bizarre one (looking over the spec makes me think the person tasked with making it was yanked off the filesystem team against their will)

Nowadays, it's a XML/ZIP thing.

With things like Flatbuffers, I sometimes feel we've regressed to these old formats that are just memory dumps.
Fresh from Ganymede (2020)
> In short: stop asking the user, just design the system to grossly limit the scope and impact of any damage.

Yep. This has to come from OS vendors and while iOS and Android took some steps in this direction they're still basically POSIX about it instead of capability-based.

There's also a really unfortunate trend where apps want to be the entire user interface for everything. Manage the SMSs, be the camera and photos albums, handle payments, etc. This breaks all security guarantees by the OS.
Ah, good find. There's no mention of this as a closing option in the app itself. That fee is a bit ridiculous, but it might be the best option if you have a real portfolio.

I can't find a history that shows when they added this, but it appears they at least added transfers in a few years ago:

https://www.reddit.com/r/RobinHood/comments/6tre6o/transfer_...
My guess is the following will take place: companies will generally be more open to WFH. Those who spend more time in the office will develop stronger networks and relationships, will be able to advocate for themselves more easily, and thus will be more successful. People will snowball back into the office as they see this happening. Keep in mind I’m generalizing, I’m fully aware that you can create a culture that doesn’t disadvantage those that are remote, I’m just not convinced that broadly will happen.
Thank you. This WSB GameStop phenomenon is one of the most poisonous news stories I've seen in the history of the web. It seems to induce irrationality and melodrama as though it were a psychedelic drug.
I'd be interested in the "how" if you'd consider creating a blog on using Hotwire with Phoenix.

Or, if the source is in a public repo.
So? If you had shorted GME yesterday, you would make a bunch now that the price has collapsed.
Cloud services like Amazon's AWS, Google's GCP, and Microsoft Azure are the proprietary operating systems of the modern day.

Today, they're doing many of the bad-for-the-world things that Microsoft did with Windows in the 90s.
Apple and Facebook at odds over privacy move that will hit online ads
I'm not sure this model ever worked. "form a company whose principle thing is creating open source licensed software." That is not the model that was used to create open source in the "golden age" (although that model may not work anymore either).
If you don't see a difference between updating software and hardware, I don't really know what to say.
I keep hearing this argument, but Robinhood's actions will directly cause those people to lose money. By only allowing to sell the stock, most people will hop out or hedge which will tank the price. If they let it play out, then they can blame the market for the outcome.
It's one thing to commit securities fraud. It's another to do it, blatantly and openly, as part of the biggest news story of the week.
Melvin closed out of their position.
Regulators and prosecutors do as industry tells them. In this case it's not clear that industry wants anything changed. The smarter hedge reptiles made some money riding the momentum of this thing, and will make more riding it back down when it collapses. Being reptiles, they won't cry because one or two of their number didn't make it out alive. Smart money is never going to outlaw dumb money.
AI anomaly detection in software licensing logs
Just going by the numbers, wouldn't we have seen much more volume if they had actually closed out their position?
https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/rulebooks/finra-rules/5...

Without such regulation what would stop any bad actor from colluding with brokers to halt trading a moments that benefit themselves? Pretty hard to enforce or prove in practise but the idea that brokerages can prevent groups of users from accessing markets willy nilly is absurd. This is for cash products no any futures/options, even for those once they grant access it should not be taken away
It wasn't that I didn't need practice, its just that the practice you get from sitting and listening in classes and doing problems in exams was enough practice. It wasn't as if I could just go to the exams without doing anything else.

The trick was mostly that most things just clicked for me, and I could use that to figure the rest out and fill in the gaps during exams to solve the problems they didn't explain in any classes.
Julia can do GPU kernels (Intel, AMD, Nvidia) also, they just aren't all implemented in pure Julia (or tuned) yet, hence the CUDA lib calls.

https://juliagpu.org/
https://juliagpu.org/2020-09-28-gemmkernels/
Strange how only being allowed to sell and not buy may drive a price down.
Is Gamestop a Win for the Little Guy?
Is it possible that there really is no rhyme or reason why stocks go up other than large amounts of money suddenly piling on over made up catalysts?

It would be hilarious if we really let this system create all of our upper class and elites and took this long to see it exposed.
Facebook Open Source: 2020 Year in Review
Absolutely not if the shares were bought on margin (ie: partly with the broker’s money)
The Kamala Harris Article WaPo Tried to Memoryhole
Why are you working if not to earn privilege?
I wonder if anyone shorted before trading was halted on multiple platforms? Because if there was, that's essentially using insider information/manipulation. The problem is that the SEC is a rotating door between these same firms, so have no reason to intervene.
So it's okay for billionaires to short GME but when people on reddit come together it's a problem?

I hope wallstreetbets crashes the market and makes everyone on the NYE cry like a baby. The unfortunate reality is that will never happen; they will just all up Biden and he'll cut them a check.
Well said. Free and lazy over freedom and work.
Thanks for collecting the links, and to Animats for the great list!
Do you not agree that helping PoC reverses white supremacy?
One can't. — this myth is quite common.

Passes can be used to get exemptions from i.p. address range blocks, they do not permit posting from Tor.

That page is probably very deliberately not super clear about that, but it you will find that buying a pass will not allow one to post from Tor.
cab.brown.edu
"Curb Trading" is certainly a creative way to say "locked buy orders but allowed sells so that their largest partner loses less money"

If the SEC does nothing about this its time to reevaluate the existence of the SEC in its current form.
Likely that Citadel sold lots of uncovered calls to RH users.
Inigo truly is a modern-day magician.